Echocardiographic and hemodynamic characteristics of reconstructed bicuspid aortic valves at rest and exercise

Repair of diseased bicuspid aortic valves has gained increasing interest as an alternative to conventional valve replacement. Hemodynamic data at exercise have not been reported before. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and echocardiographic status of patients after bicuspid aort...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical research in cardiology 2005-07, Vol.94 (7), p.437-444
Hauptverfasser: Schmidtke, C, Poppe, D, Dahmen, G, Sievers, H-H
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Repair of diseased bicuspid aortic valves has gained increasing interest as an alternative to conventional valve replacement. Hemodynamic data at exercise have not been reported before. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and echocardiographic status of patients after bicuspid aortic valve repair at rest and exercise. Between 03/94 and 09/02 a reconstruction of an incompetent bicuspid aortic valve was performed in 25 patients (mean age 35+/-12.1 years, group A, mean insufficiency 2.8 preoperatively). Patients were investigated clinically and echocardiographically after 2.1+/-2.4 (0.1-8.9) years at rest and exercise and compared to 20 controls (group B). Clinical followup was complete. There were no deaths, reoperations, thromboembolic or bleeding complications. At last examination 21 patients were in NYHA class I, n=4 in NYHA class II and mean aortic valve insufficiency (AI) was 1.0 with one patient having an AI>II degrees. Maximum and mean pressure gradient (dPmax/mean) across the aortic valve at rest were 14+/-5.5/7+/-2.6 mmHg for patients of group A and 7+/-2.5/3.6+/-1.1 mmHg in group B. Mean AVA at rest was 2.6+/-0.8 (group A) vs 2.9+/-0.6 cm(2) (group B, p=0.025), valvular resistance 13.4+/-4.8 (group A) vs 13.6+/-2.9 dyn x s x cm(-5) (group B, p>0.05). All individuals were stressed up to 100 W (dPmax/mean 21+/-6.8/11+/-3.6, group A vs 11+/-2.9/6+/-1.3 mmHg, group B). 56% of group A and 85% of group B could be stressed up to 175 W with dPmax/mean 24.5+/-8.3/12+/-4.2 and 16+/-3.6/8+/-1.4 mmHg, respectively (p
ISSN:0300-5860
1861-0684
1435-1285
1861-0692
DOI:10.1007/s00392-005-0241-2